No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Indonesia, the challenge of urbanization
... Recognizing the Pejompongan I & II water treatment plants as part of Sukarno's modernist monuments illuminates the ways in which colonial discourses around modernity, urban water, and citizenship were inscripted into postcolonial Jakarta, and rescues them from their obscurity in the history of 18 Pejompongan I & II were each built at a cost of approximately $7 million us (pam Jaya 1992b) but these significant investments are not addressed in either discussions of Sukarno's monumental Jakarta (see Kusno 2000;Leclerc 1993;MacDonald 1995), or the history of public infrastructure in Jakarta (see World Bank 1974;Hamer, Steer, and Williams 1986;Chifos and Suselo 2000). The familiar argument that Sukarno's government neglected public infrastructure in favour of public monuments ignores the construction of Pejompongan I & II as both public infrastructure, and a monument for the modernization of the city. ...
... 15 Pejompongan I &II were both built at a cost of approximately $7 million US (PAM Jaya 1992b). However, these investments made under the Sukarno government are not addressed in either discussions of Sukarno's 'monumental Jakarta' (see Kusno, 2000;Leclerc, 1993;MacDonald, 1995), or the history of public infrastructure in Jakarta (see World Bank, 1974;Hamer et al., 1986;Chifos and Suselo, 2000). The familiar argument that Sukarno's government neglected public infrastructure in favour of public monuments ignores the construction of Pejompongan I & II as both a 'public' infrastructure, and a monument for the modernization of the city. ...
This paper queries the relevance of the ‘splintering urbanism’ thesis to postcolonial cities of the South, and responds to calls for the production of a decentered theory of urbanization through a case study of Jakarta. Drawing on archival and interview data, the paper demonstrates that Jakarta has, since its inception, been characterized by a high degree of differentiation of access to water supply, and of fragmentation of water supply networks. We document the origins of this fragmentation in the colonial era, and trace the legacy of the colonial constructions within the postcolonial city. Moreover, we demonstrate that the introduction of private sector management (in 1988) has not significantly disrupted, and certainly not caused, this pattern. In short, we provide evidence to support our claim that Jakarta’s water supply system is ‘splintered’ rather than ‘splintering’, and demonstrate that this phenomenon was not caused by the rise (or fall) of the ‘modern infrastructural ideal’. In order to explain this sustained fragmentation of infrastructure and access, the paper develops a conceptual framework of postcolonial governmentality that emphasizes the interrelationship between materiality, governmentality, identity, and urbanization, in particular through demonstrating how contested and evolving process of social differentiation are linked to the differentiation of water supply infrastructures and of urban spaces. Although we are wary of any simplistic comparisons between the colonial past and present, we argue that the optic of postcolonial governmentality provides a powerful lens for dissecting the power relations that continue to structure access to water supply and urban space in cities in the South.
... Assistance from research assistants Endah Shofiani and E.J. Martijn, and cooperation by water supply professionals in Jakarta and staff at local and international NGO offices during fieldwork are gratefully acknowledged, as is assistance from archival staff at colonial archives in Amsterdam and Leiden (the Netherlands) However, while all households use a heterogeneous mixture of supply sources, poor households typically access lower qualities and quantities of water, purchased at unit costs higher than those for the water available to wealthier households. Over several decades the lack of access to the city's centralized piped network, and the associated impacts upon the urban poor, have provided the rationale for the initiation of numerous development programs with the 'will to improve' access to clean water in Jakarta (Bakker et al., 2006; Li, 2007). 2 Premised upon analyses which treat the problems of persistent exclusion as apolitical and purely technical matters (see Li, 2007), successive programs of development have variously identified the lack of access to water supply infrastructure as a problem of corruption (Server, 1996), lack of finance (World Bank, 1974; Akhtar 2005; World Bank, 2005), or of rapid rates of urban growth outpacing infrastructural development (Hamer et al., 1986; Chifos and Suselo, 2000). Alternately, academic analyses critiquing these interventions point to the effects of neoliberal restructuring and its concomitant reshaping of urban infrastructure networks (Graham and Marvin, 2001). ...
This article seeks to extend recent debates on urban infrastructure access by exploring the interrelationship between subjectivity, urban space and infrastructure. Specifically, it presents a case study of the development and differentiation of the urban water supply in Jakarta, Indonesia. Drawing on concepts of governmentality and materiality, it argues that the construction of difference through processes of segregation and exclusion enacted via colonial and contemporary ‘technologies of government’ has spatial, discursive and material dimensions. In particular, it seeks to ‘rematerialize’ discussions of (post‐)colonial urban governmentality through insisting upon the importance of the contested and iterative interrelationship between discursive strategies, socio‐economic agendas, identity formation and infrastructure creation. In exploring these claims with respect to Jakarta, the article draws on data derived from archival, interview and participant observation research to present a genealogy of the city's urban water supply system from its colonial origins to the present. We illustrate how discourses of modernity, hygiene and development are enrolled in the construction of urban subjects and the disposition of water supply infrastructure (and are also resisted), and document the relationship between the classification of urban residents, the differentiation of urban spaces and lack of access to services. The article closes with a discussion of the implications for analyses of the differentiation of urban services and urban space in cities in the global South.
Résumé
Cet article tente d’élargir les récents débats sur l’accès aux infrastructures urbaines en explorant l’interrelation entre subjectivité, espace urbain et infrastructure. Plus précisément, il présente une étude de cas sur l’aménagement et la différenciation de l’approvisionnement en eau de Jakarta, en Indonésie. À partir des concepts de gouvernementalité et de matérialité, il fait valoir que la construction d’une différence par des processus de ségrégation et d’exclusion, mis en œuvre par des « technologies de gouvernement » coloniales et contemporaines, a des dimensions spatiales, discursives et physiques. Ce travail vise notamment à« rematérialiser » les discussions sur la gouvernementalité urbaine (post‐)coloniale en insistant sur l’importance de l’interrelation contestée et itérative entre stratégies discursives, programmes socio‐économiques, formation d’identité et création d’infrastructures. Tout en explorant ces idées dans le cadre de Jakarta, l’article exploite des données issues d’archives, d’entretiens et d’observations participantes afin de présenter une généalogie du réseau urbain de distribution d’eau, de ses origines coloniales jusqu’à nos jours. Il montre comment les discours sur la modernité, l’hygiène et l’aménagement s’inscrivent dans la représentation des sujets urbains et dans la disposition de l’infrastructure d’approvisionnement en eau (et comment s’exprime la résistance) ; de plus, il expose la relation entre la classification des résidents, la différenciation des espaces urbains et le manque d’accès aux services de la ville. La conclusion termine par les conséquences pour les analyses sur la différenciation des services urbains et de l’espace urbain dans les grandes villes des pays du Sud.
With approximately thirty cities of more than a quarter-million population, including seven with more than one million, Indonesia is a primary focus for the study of the city in Southeast Asia. By occupying a position midway between the hyperdevelopment of Singapore and the isolation of Burma, Indonesian cities provide insight into both continuity and change in the region. A morphological model identifies political and economic trends that influence urban form through time. Based chiefly on large, coastal provincial capitals, the model applies in some degree to all cities in Indonesia.
The transmigration programme in Indonesia is now acknowledged to be the largest voluntary land settlement scheme in the world. The programme began as an attempt to correct the population imbalance between Java and the Outer Islands. Since the inception of the programme under the Dutch in 1904 through mid-1986 over 4 million people have moved. Major emphasis in the programme has turned to regional development in the Outer Islands. Despite considerable success the programme has been plagued by numerous problems. These include inadequate income levels, improper site selection, poor matching of settlement models to the specific sites, environmental deterioration, migrant adjustment, land conflicts and financing. Several of these problems have been caused as a result of the attempt to reach unrealistic settlement targets. Given current budget constraints efforts now focus on the improvement of existing settlements and the encouragement of spontaneous or swakarsa migration. A secondary phase of the transmigration programme involves the development of other settlement models. One attempt involves the experiment with small enterprises some of which involve the private sector. The future success of both new and existing settlements hinges on the development of off-farm employment. In this sense, small industries and opportunities in the service sector of the settlement themselves and nearby small towns are critical. The exploration of a new basis for employment must be carried out in concert with the National Urban Development Strategy (NUDS) which identifies the functional potential of small and intermediate-sized towns in the Outer Islands.
The analysis of data from the Kampong Improvement project in the small and medium sized cities of central Java demonstrates that house upgrading is no longer the only measure of improved welfare for Kampong residents. The privatizing of previously public essential services like water supply and those of MCK facilities (bath, laundry, toilet) currently provide evidence of improved living standards. Kampong residents in larger cities did not exhibit more responsible attitudes toward maintenance than smaller-city residents. Kampong location in relation to the city center, the city's economy and the socio-economic characteristics of the population were more influential factors.
Abstract The transmigration program in Indonesia involves the government-financed movement of landless people from the crowded Inner Islands of Java, Bali, and Lombok to agricultural-based settlements in the Outer Islands. A major goal is to stimulate regional development and create employment opportunities, but the success of many settler families in the individual settlement schemes is clearly linked to participation in off-farm employment (OFE). Evidence from household interviews in nine South Sumatran transmigration settlements indicates that employment away from the family's own farm is extensive. While such employment is dominated by the male head of the family, in slightly more than half of the households both the head and the spouse held some form of OFE. There is a strong spatial bias in the patterns of employment: work on the settlement scheme is much more common than work off the scheme. The considerable variation in OFE participation by settlement is attributable to environmental characteristics that affect farm production and the availability of and access to jobs.
Individual characteristics such as age are important in explaining the incidence of OFE, but the integrated use of family labor resources is the real key to understanding employment behavior. The number and ages of children, other family members working off-farm, and the presence of home industries are important influences in family decisionmaking.
The theoretical contributions of Chayanov and Low are useful in understanding peasant economies, especially off-farm employment behavior, but they must be extended by incorporating employment histories, the dynamics of family structure, and individual skills. The focus on family resources and characteristics is an important basis for expanding our knowledge of OFE, yet such advances must be complemented by spatial, temporal, and contextual factors in deriving a broader theory of peasant economies.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.